this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2024
297 points (98.1% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5197 readers
849 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world. About 1C of total warming. Second chart: about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability. Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases. About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
297
Taking CO2 out of the air would be an absurdly expensive way to fight climate change (www.theverge.com)
submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
87 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yep, that was my original point. Trees just can't cut it. They have such a little impact they're almost not worth even discussing. Far larger gains can be found elsewhere.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

So ride bikes? What large gainz are you thinking of? Can't leave me hanging, Friend.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Well, kind of... Reducing carbon emissions would be far more effective than trying to capture the emissions we currently use.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yes, and Por Que No Los Dos?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

I didn't say you can't do both. The real danger is the green washing. In fact, it's not a danger, it's currently already used to subvert carbon cap and trade regulations. Scams of companies that sell carbon credits for protecting forestry that aren't endangered to begin with. There is little to no oversight of this and is hurting our progress to fixing the issue.